Skip to main content

6.3. Relevant circumstances

New version of this publication is available

 ⚠ 

    

Please note that this country guidance document has been replaced by a more recent one. The latest versions of country guidance documents are available at https://easo.europa.eu/country-guidance.
COMMON ANALYSIS
Last updated: December 2020

In the context of Afghanistan, numerous circumstances and different profiles may require consideration of the potential applicability of exclusion grounds. The QD does not set a time limit for the application of the grounds for exclusion. Applicants may be excluded in relation to events occurring in the current conflict as well as in past conflicts.

COI indicates that excludable acts are committed by many actors both in relation to the armed conflicts, as well as in the context of general criminality and human rights abuses.

Some (non-exhaustive) examples of past events which may be related to excludable acts include:

■  The ‘Saur’ Revolution of 1978, subsequent purges and the 1979 crackdown of the uprising;
■  Soviet Union invasion (1979) and the armed conflict between the Afghan government (supported by Soviet troops) and the ‘mujahideen’ (e.g. secret services of the PDPA regime, commanders or fighters from the anti-Soviet jihad tanzeem) (1979 - 1992);
■  Afghan ‘Civil War’ (1992 - 1996);
■  Taliban regime and conflict between the Taliban and the Northern Alliance (1996 – 2001);
■  US-led military operation and Taliban-led insurgency against the Afghan government (2001 – onwards);
■  etc.

Afghan nationals have also been involved in conflicts outside Afghanistan, such as via the Fatemiyoun Brigade in Syria, which may be of relevance [See COI Report: Syria - Actors (December 2019), 2.3.4].

In relation to potential exclusion considerations, see also the chapters 1. Actors of persecution or serious harm and Analysis of particular profiles with regard to qualification for refugee status.

The examples mentioned in this chapter are non-exhaustive and non-conclusive. Each case should be examined on its own merits.